China and US conflict in a decade time

War, a means to achieve certain goals through whatever actions necessary, is one of the key importance prior to understanding the history behind the US-China conflict. B, Rusell (1916) stated the definition of war as “conflict between two groups, each of which attempts to kill and maim as many as possible of the other group in order to achieve some object which it desires” This represents an intention of gaining indecisive benefits from other actors/states through violence. Despite that, there are plentiful types of war that happened and still prevail nowadays. These involved but not limited to proxy-war and cyber (technological) war which use other means as battlegrounds. Whilst, in the context of the US and China, they attempt to compete with each other both militarily, non-violence ways. Another crucial feature to judge whether interstate war is conceivable or not has to do with build and road initiative. This strategy was adopted by Chinese leader, Xi Jin Ping in 2013. The article (Xinhua, 2015) [online] denotes this idea as "a bid to enhance regional connectivity and embrace a brighter future. " With this intention in mind, this strategy is laid out to increase the sphere of Chinese influence and accelerate economic expansion in different regions across the world. This links to the probability of interstate war because the more Chinese influence, the closer they will be to their all time rival (the US). Asides, the Chinese government is not the only one to introduce such a massive project. In the US, President Joe Biden has initiated the so-called ‘Build Back Better’ framework. The vice president of government in the US has announced that “when it is signed into law, the Build Back Better framework will spark innovation and jobs in the US. , directing the level of investments toward the equitable and competitive clean energy economy that businesses, investors, and communities across the U. S. demand”. This implicates how the US endeavours to mitigate social class differentiation and resolve environmental issues corresponding to the development plan in China. The prolonged war between the US and China has long been a serious tension which impacts economically, politically and sociologically. This essay will particularly draw attention to why there is a low probability of war declaration in the upcoming decade. Several reasons behind this hypothesis include a concern about resource scarcity, diplomatic issues. This occurs for the reason that mainland China does not identify Taiwan and Hong Kong as separated nations and a high demand for authorities to reunifine as ‘People’s Republic of China’. It is commonly known as “one China policy”according to BBC (2016). In addition, as the trend of the global population is increasingly problematic, it is extremely difficult to disregard how infinite supplies are as a comparison to the current demand. At the end of this literature will be a summary of why I believed in such a manner. Additionally, this academic paper will also provide limitations, further suggestions to formulate qualitative analyses and responses. To understand the logic behind the continuous dispute between China and the US, one should take historical context into account. While the roots of controversy did not happen until the establishment of ‘the People’s Republic of China‘ in 1949. As a consequence, their main rival (nationalist party) led by Chiang Kai Shek had exiled to Taiwan with the US support. A year following the initiation of nationalist party in mainland China, the Korean war occured in 1950. At the time, the Chinese government supported the North and demanded for a division while the US aided the South. Ever since, there have been ongoing events that damaged this relationship. These include, for instance, Ping Pong diplomacy and Tiananmen Square Massacre which took place in 1971 and 1989, respectively. Nevertheless, as an evolution of the Chinese economy, military capabilities, cultural and diplomacy. These factors accumulate the fact that China surpassed Japan and became one of the world’s biggest economies in 2010. This demonstrates how powerful China can be in spite of their ranking financially and militarily, that still outlying the US. As (Reiter, 2003) mentioned, the definition of the bargaining model of war refers to “the allocation of scarce resources among unlimited and competing uses''. This further entails how the infinite number of capital can potentially cause interstate war. On the other hand, “both sides have a genuine and shared interest in keeping their rivalry within boundaries, both to avoid unnecessary clashes and to facilitate cooperation on issues where U. S. and Chinese interests overlap ie; climate change, pandemic prevention, etc “(Waltz, 2020). This literature elaborates how both the US and China showed their willingness to cooperate and seek for peace-keeping in a profound manner. This possibility occured in order to avoid the cost of warfare, devastation and massacres which simultaneously deter the economy and political institution. Another contribution is that even though war is able to exist, it will not be an interstate war with more than 1, 000 battle deaths. Doyle (1986) suggested, “even though ears often cost more than the economic return they generate, liberal republics also are prepared to protect promote-sometimes forbibly-democracy, private property, and the rights of individuals overseas against nonrepublic”. This illustrates, in order to fight against an undemocratically elected state and protect the rights of individuals, war between nonrepublic can still occur. Unlike WWI and WWII, interstate war will happen on the condition that there are multiple reasons to stimulate. For instance, Kiger (2021) held an assumption that there were up to eight events which lead to World War I. Similarly, Alison (2018) argued, “will the impending clash between these two great nations lead to war? Obviously, no one knows. We can be certain, however, that the dynamic Thucydides identified will intensify in the years ahead”. This implies the fact that it is unpredictable whether war between two hegemony (US and China) will arise in the foreseeable future. Yet, IR scholars have explained there will be a high probability of more serious tension in a decade's time. On the contrary, an array of critics are of the opinion that the bargaining model of war is less appropriated in the circumstances of interstate war between China and the US. They often held a misperception as (Zeitoff and Little, 2017) explained that “ a common criticism of this approach is that it fails to account for nonmaterial (e. g. psychological) factors that may influence the bargaining process”. As such, this interpreted one of the theoretical flaws that there are other variables which can also lead to more or less potential of the bargaining process as well. Additionally, by the same token the bargaining model of war is unable to suite this conflict as